Portable electronic devices typically comprise a touchpad or touch screen display, or other interface system capable of detecting the location of contact with the interface. Touching or otherwise contacting the touchpad, touch screen or other interface at a particular location causes the electronic device to perform a particular function. The touch pad, touch screen or other interface of such a device typically has one or more touch-sensitive locations.
However, it can be a shortcoming of the touch-sensitive location that it does not exhibit a tactile feeling which provides a user with feedback to confirm whether a selection has been made or not. As a result, the user may lose the position of the touch-sensitive location, or may not recognize the feeling provided when the location is pushed. Additionally, a touch-sensitive location of interest that does not exhibit tactile feeling may be difficult to locate when a user is concentrating on another portion of the screen, for example, the content of a game instead of the controls for the game.
A further drawback of such technology insofar as there are multiple touch locations is that more than one of those locations may be touched or otherwise contacted simultaneously during operation of the device, resulting in activation of an unwanted function (“multiple simultaneous touches”). Furthermore, even in the case of proper operation, certain applications of the technology require that, prior to pushing, a user carefully position his finger over the touch-sensitive location substantially in register with the sensitized area, leaving an air gap so as not to activate a sensitive location accidentally. When a plurality of locations is to be touched or otherwise contacted in sequence, the user is forced to position his finger over each successive location in the sequence, while leaving an airgap to prevent unintended activation. This is inconvenient and slows operation of the device, but is not practically speaking avoidable if a user's execution of discrete touches or contacts at desired different locations is to be achieved.
As a remedy, it has been suggested to mount “buttons” on a touch screen or other interface, overlying at least in part desired locations that are touch-sensitive. For instance, according to U.S. Publication No. US2010/0079403 (the “403 Publication”), a physical element is removably affixed to a touch screen or other interface, whereby to provide one or more tactile structures, such as properly sized button attachment structures. These structures are “mounted on or otherwise held against” the screen or other interface “by suction or static forces”, or “using an adhesive material such as a fugitive adhesive”. The button attachment structures are said “[i]n general . . . to be formed from a flexible material . . . typically stiff enough to allow button attachment structures . . . to maintain their shapes, and flexible enough to allow button attachment structures to be pressed to engage touch areas”. It is further taught that the button attachment structures “may be formed from a substantially transparent material . . . or a material which is colored or printed to effectively look like touch areas”. In the 403 Publication an embodiment for preventing accidental activation of a touch-sensitive location is discussed, wherein a button attachment structure with “a top surface, or a button actuation area, . . . is positioned at a distance above a touch-screen”, such that an airgap is maintained, with the result that a touch-sensitive location will not be activated except if a substantial force is applied.
However, the foregoing technology is disadvantageously limited. Focusing initially on a single “button attachment structure” and touch-sensitive location in isolation, the structure is affixed to the touch screen or other interface so that structure does not move. While some embodiments mentioned in the 403 Publication comprise a button actuator structure having an airgap between an actuation area and a touch-screen's touch-sensitive location, with the result that a substantial force must be applied to the actuator area to cause contact with the touch-sensitive location, there is no assurance that this will be accompanied by a “feel” which indicates to the user that contact is effected. Moreover, a fixed structure is effectively anchored at one site, and cannot be moved to any other location on the surface, during “real time” operation of the data processing device. And, in any event, a fixed structure cannot be operated by a user for the purpose of data input to indicate direction or magnitude of motion of an object or avatar, such as while playing a game.
Furthermore, when the foregoing consideration is expanded to multiple touch-sensitive locations on the same interface, additional shortcomings are evident. So-called “button attachment structures” may be affixed at respective particular locations, in effect one structure per individual touch-sensitive location. Alternatively, a single button attachment structure may include multiple button activator areas, which areas are respectively in register (at least partially) with separate ones of the touch-sensitive locations on a touchpad, touch screen or other interface. When there is a plurality of touch-sensitive locations, each overlain by its own button attachment structure or button actuator area, those structures or areas will typically be crowded together in the same manner as the touch-sensitive locations. The button attachment structures, though mitigating the need to maintain the aforementioned airgap between finger and touch-sensitive location, are no more accommodating to discrete access by a user than are the sensitive locations themselves. In addition, as previously mentioned, while removably affixed the button attachment structure or actuator areas thereof are not susceptible of real-time rearrangement from contact with one sensitive location to contact with another. Because the structure or its actuator areas are incapable of shifting among different sensitive locations, multiple structures, or multiple actuator areas, each one assigned to a different sensitive location must be small enough to be positioned “cheek by jowl” with the others. This also tends to interfere with their configuration in such manner as to facilitate the desired discrete access, and concomitant ready initiation of intended functions with precision.
The 403 publication also discloses a joystick configuration whereby a joystick actuator is attached to a screen directly under the joystick's pivot point, and contact points connected to the joystick apply a force to the button attachment structure when the joystick is pivoted (see, for example, FIG. 9). This configuration has several drawbacks. First, since the joystick actuator is arranged such that the portion directly beneath the pivot point is occupied by an attachment portion, this configuration does not allow for input to be generated, or buttons to be actuated, in or from the center position of the joystick. Second, such a configuration could only be operative with discrete input regions, and not input regions simulating joysticks. For example, a game program with an input region simulating a joystick would require contact be made at the center location and the input device moved outwardly to indicate direction and/or magnitude—which would be incompatible with the joystick configuration of the 403 publication. Third, since the joystick relies on attachment portions that actuate fixed position button attachments, the disclosed configuration cannot indicate the magnitude of motion of an object or avatar, such as while playing a game.
Along such lines, in U.S. Publication No. U.S. 2006/0256090 (the “090 Publication”) it is observed that there are many styles of “input devices for performing operations in an electronic system”. An example given is “touch controls such as touch pads and touch screens that allow a user to make selections and move a cursor by simply touching the touch surface via a finger or stylus”. But, it is explained that even if “a simple decal is provided over the touch pad to indicate the location of dedicated touch controls”, the user must still examine the interface surface during use to identify the location, which slows productivity. It is further noted that advanced touch sensing devices do not provide an indication of when there has been a successful touch input. Thus, the referenced system is characterized as providing “no indication of whether something has been selected”.
Therefore, the 090 Publication offers a modified approach. It is prescribed that “to generate the various mechanical control inputs, . . . [a] mechanical overlay includes one or more mechanical actuators that move relative to base [which] is configured for removable placement over the touch-sensitive surface of the touch sensing input device”. Accordingly, when the base is placed over the touch-sensitive surface and when the mechanical actuators are moved, the touch-sensitive surface senses the motion of the mechanical actuators and produces signals indicative thereof (the mechanical actuators provide the touch inputs rather than a finger or stylus). For its part, the “base of the mechanical overlay can be attached or held against the touch sensing input device in a variety of different ways including by clips, pins, tabs, snaps, latches, screws, adhesive, Velcro material, magnets, static attraction, vacuum (e.g. suction cups)”.
Although both of the 403 and 090 Publications purport to disclose improved technologies whereby a mechanical or other element is operated by a user to exert force upon a touch-sensitive location of a touch pad, touch screen or other interface, both of them fall short. More specifically, neither one enables input of data indicating direction and magnitude of motion, or addresses the problem of how to mitigate unwanted imprecision in contacting a desired touch-sensitive location while avoiding contact with other touch-sensitive locations around it.
Other approaches have also been suggested:                Thus, in U.S. Publication No. U.S. 2006/0022956 there is disclosed an electronic apparatus which includes a touch screen, optionally multipoint, that provides user input and display capabilities. The touch screen is said to be operative by making contact with a touch input area on the screen, i.e., a virtual data input element. This has drawbacks from the standpoint of incapacity to provide a lack of “feel” to the user concerning whether contact has resulted in data input.        In U.S. Pat. No. 7,391,410 (the “410 patent”) there is disclosed a movement input device comprising a touchscreen contact part which protrudes from the bottom side of a unit for fastening the movement input device to a portable electronic device that includes a touchscreen. It is further disclosed that there is a user actuation part, protruding from the top side of the fastening unit and aligned with the touch screen contact part, which user actuation part is actuable for free angular movement around an axis whereby to input data about (at least) an angle of the user interaction part. Nevertheless, there is an absence of teaching as to a data entry element which is movable over the face of the touch screen in other than angular fashion. Additionally, the input device disclosed by the 410 patent provides an input signal to the touch screen directly opposite to the angle provided by the user's input—i.e., a user moving the joystick at an angle of 45 degrees, will result in an input signal of 225 degrees (or −135 degrees) to the touch screen. With this configuration, a user would be required to move the joystick in the direction opposite of the input desired—a counterintuitive operation—or additional software would be needed to process the input correctly.        In U.S. Publication No. U.S. 2010/0207899 there is disclosed a character input device in which are incorporated an input tool and a detection unit, the input tool comprising a plate-shaped unit superimposed over a surface of the detection unit and such unit including a projection element for contact with the detection unit. The input tool is said to be for enabling directional input, but has an intricate construction and (from all that appears) a limited range of motion. Additionally, the input tool may disrupt clear views of the detection unit surface thereunder. Furthermore, this input device does not appear to return automatically to a center position of the interface region's range of motion. For example, when a user moves the input device from the center position and then releases the input device, it will not automatically return to the center position. This would render the input device poorly suited to input operations that rely on a center position for calibrating an input's direction and magnitude, such as an input region simulating a joystick.        In U.S. Publication No. U.S. 2010/0090974 (the “974 publication”) there is disclosed a technology for providing input to a portable terminal. Pursuant to the technology, a switch comprising a suction plate is attached to the terminal's touchscreen, and a button capable of touching the screen when pushed inserted in such suction plate. In some embodiments, the switch takes the form of a stick said to be useful as a navigation key for inputting direction. However, for reasons explained already in connection with the 090 Publication, the reported development falls short inasmuch as there is no provision for “real time” movement of the switch from one location to another on the touchscreen. Moreover, although the 974 publication discloses an embodiment capable of directional indication (see, for example, FIG. 2B), it suffers from the same shortcomings as the 410 patent. Specifically, the device provides an input signal to the touch screen directly opposite to the angle provided by the user's input—i.e., a user moving the joystick at an angle of 45 degrees, will result in an input signal of 225 degrees (or −135 degrees) to the touch screen. With this configuration, a user would be required to move the joystick counterintuitively in the direction opposite of the input desired, or additional software would be needed to correctly process the input.        
A technology which ameliorates the shortcomings discussed in the preceding passages would be a significant advance.